W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > September to December 1994

Re: HTTP: T-T-T-Talking about MIME Generation

From: Eric W. Sink <eric@spyglass.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 1994 16:25:53 -0600
Message-Id: <ab17c2eb05021004a473@[]>
To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com

>Of course, there is the political problem of getting providers to include
>this information in their documents.  There is no mention of these parameters
>in the IMG tag in the HTML 2.0 specification.  I don't know about their
>status for 3.0.

Speaking as the HTML WG chair:
They're not in the 2.0 spec since they are not really widely used yet.

Speaking as a commercial browser implementor:
We have contacts with a lot of content providers, and all have expressed a
great willingness to include HEIGHT and WIDTH attributes in their content.


I've heard another option suggested:  Have the inline image sizes returned
by the HTTP server as headers when the base document is retrieved.  These
hints could look something like this:

Image size: myfile.gif  image/gif  400x300  49152

Where the four components on the line are the [partial] URL, the MIME type,
the image dimensions, and the size of the image file in bytes.  Current
browsers could ignore them.  Browsers who make use of them will have to be
able to cope with their absence.  Cool servers will keep a database of this
information around so that it doesn't have to be looked up on the fly.

Eric W. Sink, Senior Software Engineer --  eric@spyglass.com
                                           I don't speak for Spyglass.
"Can I get a direct flight back to reality, or do I have to change planes
in Denver?" - The Santa Clause
Received on Friday, 16 December 1994 13:22:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:13 UTC